Xinran Liu1,2,3, Paul R Sutton2,3, Rory McKenna4, Mika N Sinanan5, B Jane Fellner3,6, Michael G Leu1,3,7, Cris Ewell3. 1. Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States. 3. University of Washington Information Technology Services, Seattle, Washington, United States. 4. Department of Telecommunications, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States. 6. Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States. 7. Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The use of text messaging in clinical care has become ubiquitous. Due to security and privacy concerns, many hospital systems are evaluating secure text messaging applications. This paper highlights our evaluation process, and offers an overview of secure messaging functionalities, as well as a framework for how to evaluate such applications. METHODS: Application functionalities were gathered through literature review, Web sites, speaking with representatives, demonstrations, and use cases. Based on similar levels of functionalities, vendors were grouped into three tiers. Essential and secondary functionalities for our health system were defined to help narrow our vendor choices. RESULTS: We stratified 19 secure messaging vendors into three tiers: basic secure communication, secure communication within an existing clinical application, and dedicated communication and collaboration systems. Our essential requirements revolved around functionalities to enhance security and communication, while advanced functionalities were mostly considered secondary. We then narrowed our list of 19 vendors to four, then created clinical use cases to rank the final vendors. DISCUSSION: When evaluating a secure messaging application, numerous factors must be considered in parallel. These include: what clinical processes to improve, archiving text messages, mobile device management, bring your own device policy, and Wi-Fi architecture. CONCLUSION: Secure messaging applications provide a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant communication platform, and also include functionality to improve clinical collaboration and workflow. We hope that our evaluation framework can be used by other health systems to find a secure messaging application that meets their needs. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
OBJECTIVE: The use of text messaging in clinical care has become ubiquitous. Due to security and privacy concerns, many hospital systems are evaluating secure text messaging applications. This paper highlights our evaluation process, and offers an overview of secure messaging functionalities, as well as a framework for how to evaluate such applications. METHODS: Application functionalities were gathered through literature review, Web sites, speaking with representatives, demonstrations, and use cases. Based on similar levels of functionalities, vendors were grouped into three tiers. Essential and secondary functionalities for our health system were defined to help narrow our vendor choices. RESULTS: We stratified 19 secure messaging vendors into three tiers: basic secure communication, secure communication within an existing clinical application, and dedicated communication and collaboration systems. Our essential requirements revolved around functionalities to enhance security and communication, while advanced functionalities were mostly considered secondary. We then narrowed our list of 19 vendors to four, then created clinical use cases to rank the final vendors. DISCUSSION: When evaluating a secure messaging application, numerous factors must be considered in parallel. These include: what clinical processes to improve, archiving text messages, mobile device management, bring your own device policy, and Wi-Fi architecture. CONCLUSION: Secure messaging applications provide a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant communication platform, and also include functionality to improve clinical collaboration and workflow. We hope that our evaluation framework can be used by other health systems to find a secure messaging application that meets their needs. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
Authors: Mitesh S Patel; Neha Patel; Dylan S Small; Roy Rosin; Jeffrey I Rohrbach; Nathaniel Stromberg; C William Hanson; David A Asch Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-03-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Neha Patel; James E Siegler; Nathaniel Stromberg; Neil Ravitz; C William Hanson Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-08-10 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Jennifer A Przybylo; Ange Wang; Pooja Loftus; Kambria H Evans; Isabella Chu; Lisa Shieh Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2014-08-11 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Joy L Lee; Areeba Kara; Monica Huffman; Marianne S Matthias; Bethany Radecki; April Savoy; Jason T Schaffer; Michael Weiner Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2022-03-16 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Oliver Maassen; Sebastian Fritsch; Julia Gantner; Saskia Deffge; Julian Kunze; Gernot Marx; Johannes Bickenbach Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-12-21 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Laura Nichols; Dubert Guerrero; Devendranath Mannuru; Marc D Basson; Abe E Sahmoun; Dinesh Bande Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 3.263